Britain's leading haulage firms today threw their weight behind a campaign launched by a militant truck driver to persuade ministers to scrap a planned fuel duty rise due in April.

The Freight Transport Association (FTA) and the Road Haulage Association (RHA) are backing the FairFuelUK campaign, co-ordinated by Peter Carroll, a haulier who orchestrated previous protests as well as the successful Gurkha Justice Campaign of 2009 with Joanna Lumley. Carroll has previously warned that he would bring the campaign to Whitehall, raising the spectre of road blockades seen in 2008 and 2000. His formal position during this campaign is against direct action.

The truckers, plus factory owners hit by higher energy costs, are calling for help, partly through a fuel price stabiliser that would allow taxes to be cut when forecourt costs rise to a particular level.

Trouble has been looming as the price of petrol nears record levels, driven by a combination of the $98 price of a barrel of oil and ministers' decision to increase fuel duty and VAT, just after the new year.

"The situation regarding fuel is threatening the whole economy," said Theo de Pencier, chief executive of the FTA. "We feel that the general business community and the motoring public now have common cause with our industry. This campaign is the opportunity to put maximum pressure on the government to win some form of concession to get the pressure off." Petrol retailers have already urged ministers to abandon the next automatic escalator rise in fuel duty of 1p plus inflation, which would see pump prices soar by up to 5p a litre, with an additional 3p potentially in the pipeline from rising oil prices. This could push the cost of unleaded petrol up to £1.36 a litre and diesel up to £1.40 a litre, some fear.

Manufacturers belonging to the Major Energy Users Council have started their own Carbon Action Group and called for meetings with ministers to find ways of dealing with high energy costs and increasing taxes. The CBI, the biggest employers' organisation, added its voice to those expressing concern. "Rising fuel and commodity costs are having a negative impact on businesses, particularly for freight and manufacturing firms," said Ian McCafferty, its chief economic adviser.

The Item Club, a respected group of independent economic forecasters, said in a report that if oil averaged $100 over the year it would drive up inflation by a further 0.5% "threatening UK economic recovery".

Meanwhile the trade union representing Britain's oil and petrol tanker drivers said it would ballot members over possible strike action in a dispute over pay, pensions and working conditions.

Unite said that despite rising oil prices, contractors responsible for the delivery of oil and petrol supplies to petrol stations had consistently squeezed the pay and working conditions of around 3,000 tanker drivers.

"Tanker drivers play a crucial role in the economy, delivering fuel safely and on time, but their industry, which is worth billions, is content to attack the drivers' pay, pensions and conditions," said Len McCluskey, Unite general secretary-elect.

The transport secretary, Philip Hammond, responded by accusing McCluskey of "attempting to cause huge disruption by targeting our fuel supply. Mr McCluskey is clearly an old-style militant who wants to take us back to the dark days of the 70s. His rise to power is symbolic of how the Labour party has been dragged to the left since Tony Blair stepped down. This is quickly becoming a test of Ed Miliband's credibility – he needs to act quickly to call off his union baron backers from attempting to bring this country to its knees."

The government has signalled it is looking at the possibility of deferring planned fuel tax rises.

But David Cameron is also willing to push through fresh anti-strike laws if the oil tanker drivers and transport workers launch a round of strikes this spring. He is keen, however, not to be seen to be acting first and provoking a confrontation with the unions.

Senior Tories believe the business secretary, Vince Cable, is willing to change trade union strike laws if there is clear evidence that strikes are proliferating.

Cameron has focused on a new requirement that the majority of those entitled to vote back a strike before the strike has protection from civil action by employers. At present a strike is protected if a simple majority of those voting back a strike.